Withdrawal and Productivity Decline Through Excessive Loss of Focus in the Workplace
Loss of productivity — and in some cases excessive loss — can often be detected using a variety of monitoring and performance tools. However, attempting to address such losses through purely top-down, power-based interventions is far less effective than understanding the underlying psychological mechanisms at play. In this article, we examine the SAD cycle (Shocking content – Affection – Divinity) as a framework for understanding these dynamics and for restoring sustainable productivity.
While neuroticism has long been studied as a stable personality trait associated with emotional instability, its behavioral manifestations — particularly withdrawal — are often treated in isolation, framed as situational reactions or avoidance behaviors. In this article, we move beyond the individual level and analyze the systemic risk of withdrawal escalation within the context of the modern organizational and cultural environment.
We argue that today’s social and organizational structures not only fail to mitigate withdrawal but may, in fact, amplify it. Digital communication, remote work, algorithmic feedback loops, passive social networks, and individualized media consumption all contribute to a behavioral ecology that reinforces detachment. Particularly for individuals high in neuroticism and prone to behavioral inhibition, these environments offer continuous validation for non-engagement — a phenomenon we call the Kideling effect.
Drawing from recent research in personality psychology, social neurobiology, and environmental design, we frame this phenomenon within what we term the SAD Cycle. We then introduce Structured Internal Value Hierarchies (SIVHs) as a method for reversing this spiral by re-integrating moral and interpersonal structure into the motivational architecture of the individual. Most notably, we propose the use of positive guilt — not as a symptom of dysfunction, but as a vital restorative signal for self-alignment and relational re-engagement.
Withdrawal as a bottomless pit
Among the various traits and subtraits described in modern personality theory, few are as dangerously under-theorized as Withdrawal, a key subcomponent of Neuroticism. While most traits exert influence through a dynamic tension between expression and suppression, Withdrawal is unique in that its behavioral expression is virtually unbounded. There is no natural terminus to not participating in life. So long as the individual remains biologically alive, withdrawal can deepen without triggering obvious external resistance.
This presents an underappreciated danger: an individual can undergo a profound transformation of behavior, values, and even self-concept — while their trait matrix remains stable. That is, the biological “base code” of personality may not change, but the patterns of existence built atop it can collapse entirely. This separation between trait structure and behavioral identity leads to what might be called “latent dissolution of Being” — a form of existential erosion without neurobiological change.
The two-fold danger of withdrawal
What makes Withdrawal particularly insidious is its two-fold danger, setting it apart from other suboptimal traits:
Endlessness — Withdrawal has no structural limit. Unlike low Industriousness, which is counteracted by deadlines and consequences, or low Conscientiousness, which often prompts social correction, withdrawal can go on indefinitely. There is no lower bound to disengagement, avoidance, and passivity except death itself. The abyss has no floor.
Amplification through societal systems — Perhaps more concerning, modern society not only fails to interrupt withdrawal cycles; it often exacerbates them. In particular, algorithmically driven platforms (social media, TikTok, news aggregators) combine elements of:
Repetitive novelty stimulation (dopaminergic hijack),
False emotional gratification (parasocial intimacy, “toxic positivity”), and
Digital compassion substitutes (likes, emoji support, ambient validation).
These systems simulate social engagement while eroding the deeper structures required for real-life affirmation and meaning. For individuals predisposed to withdrawal, such systems become neuropsychological traps — offering the illusion of connection while reinforcing dissociation.
In this context, the typical tools of productivity, therapy, or behavioral nudging often fall short. What is needed is a model that engages the value hierarchy and existential directionality of the individual — a framework that both respects their neurotic architecture and re-orients withdrawal into re-engagement. This is precisely where the SAD Cycle and Structured Internal Value Hierarchies (SIVHs) become indispensable.
SAD: The Dark Cycle That Enslaves High-Withdrawal Individuals in an Alternate World
Much has been said about the psychological effects of social media and algorithmic platforms, yet too little is known about how these digital ecosystems are structurally optimized to prey on specific personality profiles — particularly those high in the withdrawal subtrait of neuroticism. In this section, I introduce the concept of the SAD cycle (Shocking–Affectionate–Divine), a recurring neuro-archetypal pattern that captures the attention, disrupts emotional regulation, and escalates withdrawal behavior in vulnerable individuals. This cycle serves not only as an emotional hijacking mechanism but as a trapdoor into an alternate perceptual world — one that can gradually replace lived reality for those most prone to retreat.
Shocking Content: Fear, Madness, and the Erosion of Ontological Security
The first element in the SAD cycle is shock — news, events, or imagery designed to bypass reflective processing and trigger a neurochemical surge of threat preparedness. Decades of media research have shown that the human brain is exceptionally sensitive to novelty and threat. The constant “breaking news” format, inherited from legacy television and repurposed for algorithmic feeds, functions as a mechanism of induced madness — overclocking the amygdala and prefrontal cortex to maintain a hypervigilant state in the viewer. Biochemically, this generates false excitement, sympathetic activation, and a readiness for reaction, not reflection.
From an archetypal perspective, this stage destabilizes the “hero’s ego” — the part of the psyche that maintains narrative continuity and agency. The constant exposure to geopolitical conflict, cultural outrage, or existential threats erodes the individual's trust in their own experience of reality, creating a fertile space for manipulation and withdrawal. The mind is kicked into abstraction, anger, and vicarious trauma — severed from embodied presence.
Super Mario Logan: The Court Jester of Late-Stage Media Archetypes
This mechanism is parodied — and ironically exposed — in the wildly popular YouTube satire series Super Mario Logan (SML). In this series, the character of Mr. Goodman plays both billionaire tyrant and news anchor, screaming “Breaking News!” before announcing absurd and irrelevant events. It is no coincidence that this archetypal figure holds absolute narrative control — simultaneously representing wealth, media power, and divine mockery.
While many conventional academics may bristle at the idea of using SML as a serious cultural artifact, its impact on archetypal engagement cannot be dismissed. Videos from this channel routinely garner tens of millions of views, vastly outpacing academic content or even mainstream news. Why? Because they embody — almost perfectly — the archetype of the Court Jester: the only figure who can mock both king and fool with impunity, whose vulgarity contains spiritual subversion.
By fusing the absurd with the prophetic, SML has managed to do what most modern institutions cannot: activate the archetypal unconscious of a generation disillusioned by both political polarity and institutional decay. Jung once said, “Modern man cannot see God because he does not look low enough.” In this light, platforms like SML are not just guilty pleasures — they are mirrors, held low, reflecting the dysfunction of higher structures.
Before we, as academics, rush to dismiss such platforms, we must reckon with a troubling question: Why is the mass unconscious more engaged by plush puppet satire than by intellectual dialogue? And perhaps more importantly: What have we failed to do — or say — that left this void in the first place?
Affection – Compassion and Induced Sadness
What anchors individuals with high withdrawal deeper into the SAD (Shocking–Affectionate–Divine) cycle is not merely emotional shock, but the carefully sequenced induction of compassion and sadness. Immediately following content that destabilizes the viewer — through fear, disgust, or rage — social media platforms often deliver a second stimulus: emotionally charged, affective content that simulates intimacy, sincerity, and vulnerability. This is not incidental. It is a neuropsychological sedative, precisely calibrated to elicit a parasocial “heart-to-heart” connection and thereby inhibit disengagement.
Whereas the Court Jester archetype — as represented in content like Super Mario Logan (SML) — mocks power and archetypes from a sincere symbolic standpoint, the second phase of the SAD cycle operates differently. The intent is not catharsis, satire, or wisdom through inversion, but emotional capture. SML's satire, chaotic as it appears, functions as symbolic play: it channels archetypes in a manner that gives form to the absurdities of modern life. In contrast, the so-called “Affection” stage of the SAD cycle is often manufactured empathy — emotionally manipulative content that mimics sincerity without moral grounding or ontological commitment.
Narcissism Induction Through Feigned Sadness
To understand the structure of this manipulation, one may consider a potent biblical archetype. In Revelation 17:3–5, the Whore of Babylon is described as:
“A woman sitting on a scarlet beast... arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations... And on her forehead was written a name of mystery: ‘Babylon the Great, Mother of Prostitutes and of Earth’s Abominations.’”
This figure embodies the seduction of emotion without responsibility — aestheticized moralism without actual moral structure. In today's digital landscape, this archetype emerges in a particular class of social media content: videos wherein individuals (often men) deliver monologues in tearful tones, reading from teleprompters or rehearsed scripts. These performances focus on themes of relationship dysfunction, with emphases on male guilt and female victimhood, framed in simplistic narratives of toxic masculinity, emotional neglect, and repressed womanhood.
Importantly, the issue is not that such themes are inherently false — indeed, they can be valid and necessary in genuine therapeutic or relational contexts. Rather, the concern is that these performances are theatrically constructed to resonate with the emotional vulnerability of viewers, particularly those high in neuroticism and withdrawal. By playing only one side of a complex relational truth — often omitting agency, context, or mutual responsibility — they offer not healing, but an indulgent affective mirroring that bypasses reflection and invites identification.
This dynamic results not in accountability, but in compassion-induced narcissism — an internal feedback loop in which the viewer experiences emotional resonance, believes it to be insight, and retreats further into identification with victimhood or woundedness. This pattern is not limited to relationship-based content. Similar manipulative tropes appear in videos showcasing animal abuse, environmental degradation, child poverty, and social injustice. These stimuli are presented not with actionable pathways toward change, but as pure affective hooks — dramatized sadness without resolution, agency, or invitation to moral action.
In clinical and corporate psychological observation, we have found that exposure to such media does not elicit responsible behavior or pro-social motivation. Instead, it deepens cycles of emotional withdrawal, helplessness, and passive resentment. It replaces reality-based engagement with emotional self-referentiality. These creators are not healers, nor satirists, nor genuine moral voices — they do not aspire toward the symbolic integrity of the Court Jester. Rather, many occupy the archetypal space of the Whore of Babylon: seducing with emotional intoxication while dispensing no meaningful structure for the soul or society.
In short, this phase of the SAD cycle capitalizes on emotional manipulation, not to awaken conscience, but to freeze it in affective suspension. It reifies internal drama over external action. And for those already inclined toward withdrawal, it becomes a digital womb: a place where feeling is endlessly stimulated, but transformation is never required.
Divinity: Synthetic Joy and the Archetype of the Divine Child
The final movement in the SAD (Shocking–Affectionate–Divine) cycle completes the affective loop by offering a compensatory high — content that induces joy, wonder, or laughter, often through depictions of children, pets, spontaneous innocence, or absurdity. This category, in contrast to the cynical mechanisms behind fabricated sadness, frequently taps into authentic emotional responses. Yet, even this seemingly benign content participates in the broader manipulative cycle by providing an addictive simulation of life's highest states without its existential cost.
Neurochemically, laughter and surprise — especially when cued by innocence — release oxytocin and dopamine, temporarily overriding the emotional dysregulation triggered by the earlier "Mad" and "Sad" components. From a Jungian perspective, the core archetype activated here is not the Jester, but the Divine Child: the symbolic expression of new beginnings, inner potential, and emergent selfhood. As Jung writes in Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious: "The child is potential future… it is a symbol of the self" (CW 9). The viewer is returned, however briefly, to a state of primal lightness, where innocence and potential have not yet encountered the burdens of moral responsibility or ontological ambiguity.
While much of this content is, on its surface, psychologically regenerative, its dark side lies in its replacement function. For individuals high in neuroticism — particularly the withdrawal subtrait — the “Divine” moment becomes a digitally induced illusion of existential fulfillment. This is especially true for individuals facing painful responsibility gaps: parents estranged from their children, young adults avoiding long-term commitments, or women with unresolved maternal experiences. In such cases, videos of children laughing, pets being affectionate, or spontaneous kindness between strangers serve as a simulated symbolic compensation for lost or avoided meaning.
The archetypal resonance becomes especially powerful for women whose internal anima/child duality is unresolved — the content offers the affective joy of parenting without the hardship of parenting. It is a surrogate motherhood without the suffering. For men, the parallel lies in adult content: an affective simulation of intimacy that removes the effort, risk, and moral maturity required by real relationships. In both cases, the Divine Child becomes weaponized — not to heal the psyche, but to sedate it.
From this angle, the "Divinity" layer of the SAD cycle is the most dangerous because it closes the affective loop. The viewer begins with fear, is consoled with sadness, and finally rewarded with joy — all in under a minute. The soul is manipulated without the mind ever noticing. Neurotic withdrawal is no longer just an escape from responsibility; it becomes an entrancing alternative world in which simulated purpose replaces authentic striving.
The cycle feels spiritual, but it is spiritually hollow. The laughter is real, but unearned. The affection is staged. The joy is archetypal, but divorced from individuation. And herein lies the true danger: the Divine Child is encountered, but never integrated — it is consumed as dopamine, not developed as identity.
The Dark Repetitive Cycle of SAD: Digital Mimicry of Psychopathy
Although the SAD (Shocking–Affectionate–Divine) sequence seems to oscillate between innocence and care, its structural underpinnings resonate disturbingly with the psychological characteristics of the Dark Triad — and in some cases, the Dark Tetrad. Each component of the cycle bears a shadow:
Shocking content feeds sadism and the physiological jolting of cortisol arousal.
Affection-inducing content operates on narcissistic exploitability — falsely offering emotional intimacy or compassion without authentic relational reciprocity.
Divine gladness serves as the Machiavellian tool — presenting constructed surrogates of joy (e.g., laughter, innocence, archetypes of the Divine Child), while ultimately detaching the viewer from lived responsibility and real-world generativity.
Taken together, the SAD cycle simulates the mechanics of a psychopathic relationship: it destabilizes, bonds, and rewards — all in rhythmically reinforced intervals that bypass rational control. Just like abusive interpersonal dynamics, it keeps the individual hooked, compromised, and cognitively disoriented.
From a neurobiological perspective, this feedback loop is profoundly dysregulating. Cortisol spikes followed by oxytocin-drip narratives, then dopamine-sprinkled joy — repeated over and over — leads to kindling effects in the brain. The withdrawal-prone individual becomes more prone still, as each cycle reinforces the dissociative response: away from meaning, away from responsibility, and deeper into artificial alignment with symbolic, but hollow, substitutes.
The Long-Term Damage: SAD Cycles and Withdrawal Kindling
The most dangerous aspect of the SAD cycle is not its emotional toll — though that is real — but its long-term alteration of the withdrawal threshold. Like chronic exposure to trauma, SAD-based engagement rewires the nervous system toward dissociation and fantasy-based coping. The damage is not primarily to behavior — but to ontology.
The highly withdrawing person is not merely avoiding; they are reconfiguring their interface with reality to accommodate pain-avoidance and substitute reward. Over time, this becomes a bottomless pit, as the disconnection from lived reality is not only tolerated — but preferred.
This progression mirrors what trauma researchers describe as protective adaptation, where repeated exposure to stressors without resolution leads to structural changes in personality. These include:
Avoidance of novelty or risk
Blunted emotional resilience
Cynicism about the future
Attraction to symbolic over embodied meaning
But at the existential root of this cycle lies something more fundamental: the suppression of positive guilt — the guilt that comes from failing to fulfill one’s personal mission, one’s sacred task. The kind of guilt that is meant to steer the individual toward alignment with higher internal values, long-term obligations, and transpersonal purpose.
The SAD cycle anesthetizes this guilt. It offers synthetic meaning without responsibility, a symbolic self without the cost of self-construction. Over time, this form of withdrawal is not only difficult to escape — it becomes indistinguishable from the self.
The Dark Repetitive Cycle of SAD
Despite being cloaked in the language of care, innocence, or lighthearted humor, the SAD cycle — Shocking, Affectionate, Divine — is psychologically exploitative and neurochemically destabilizing. Each part of the cycle corresponds to a different psychological manipulation strategy: shock activates cortisol and hypervigilance, affection invokes manipulated compassion and induced guilt, and divine laughter offers temporary relief through surrogate joy — often without responsibility or growth. Together, they mirror a Machiavellian structure that exploits the neurotic vulnerabilities of individuals prone to withdrawal.
Indeed, when analyzed through the lens of personality psychology, it becomes evident that the SAD cycle treats the neurotic, withdrawing individual in much the same way a dark triad (or even tetrad) personality would treat a subordinate: overwhelming their perceptual system with alternating extremes of fear, guilt, and pseudo-joy. This primes the individual for a dysregulated neurochemical response: heightened cortisol and dopamine spikes followed by crashes, reinforcing escapism, dependency, and eventually addiction.
The Long-Term Kindling Effect: Withdrawal Becomes the Default
The longer the cycle is sustained, the more it becomes neurologically entrenched. Through neuroplastic adaptation and emotional avoidance, the withdrawal-prone personality begins to treat social media as a neurochemical regulation system — a source of false activation and pseudo-restoration. Over time, this leads to:
Emotional flattening and increased stress reactivity
Avoidant coping structures in both personal and professional life
Chronic identity diffusion and reduced motivation to engage in meaningful responsibilities
These behaviors are often misread as “introversion” or “low energy,” but they are in fact the byproducts of prolonged SAD-cycle exposure. The emotional toll is not just passive; it is actively shaping the psychological identity of the individual.
Beneath this behavioral withdrawal lies a deeper existential avoidance: a fear of engaging in meaningful mission-driven action — the core of what gives a life coherent direction. This evasion of meaning, we argue, is the hidden driver of the SAD cycle's addictive potential.
The Pseudo-Hero’s Journey and the Archetype of Infinite Childhood
In archetypal terms, the SAD cycle presents a false Hero’s Journey, one in which the individual does not respond to a call to action, but to a call away from action — into an emotionally curated theatre. The key players in this world are not mentors or allies, but simulated archetypes:
The Jester, offering absurd, shocking “truths” in palatable comedic forms.
The Whore, cloaked in performative compassion, presenting curated vulnerability.
The Divine Child, extracted from life’s responsibilities, offering light without heat.
This dreamlike, emotionally indulgent space allows the individual to play out the narrative without enacting any of the real trials. Transformation is simulated; the person returns from the “journey” with no elixir, no new wisdom — only a deeper dependency on the cycle.
It is this structure that contributes to the modern epidemic of arrested adulthood — individuals biologically in their 30s or 40s, but emotionally stuck in an archetypal echo of early adolescence. The perpetual child within becomes the dominant voice, seeking safety, novelty, and symbolic meaning, while resisting responsibility, limits, or suffering.
A Vicious Byproduct: Total Vulnerability to Platform Suggestion
The most dangerous feature of the SAD cycle is its capacity to "tear open" the emotional architecture of the person — and keep it open. Once the neurochemical and symbolic systems have been scrambled and reconstituted through artificially induced highs and lows, the person becomes highly suggestible to external solutions. This is where commercial and ideological manipulation takes root.
It is no accident that this moment of high neurochemical plasticity is precisely when platforms present their monetized solutions: buy this, believe that, vote for this. These “answers” are interpreted not through reasoned analysis, but through a symbolic gap-filling mechanism. The Big Tech ecosystem becomes, in Lacanian terms, the Big Other — the unconscious authority that unites the user's internal disorientation with the illusion of restored meaning.
In other words, after the artificially induced Hero’s Journey, the platform itself steps into the role of the Savior — closing the cycle it created. And because the user never leaves the cycle, they are never reborn. They remain open, vulnerable, and endlessly rewired by the system they cannot name.
The Core of Withdrawal: Always a Withdrawal From
The true danger of withdrawal lies not in escapism per se, but in the direction of the escape. It is not a movement toward safety, comfort, or self-care. It is, in its most destructive form, a movement away from the truth — a flight from moral clarity and existential responsibility.
This is what makes the SAD cycle so spiritually corrosive. The cycle offers a potent but false antidote to guilt: not the guilt of minor social missteps or failed New Year’s resolutions, but the deeper, sacred guilt of abandoning one’s calling — the internal recognition that one has betrayed the purpose for which they were equipped. This guilt is not neurotic; it is existential. And unlike ordinary guilt, it is not resolved by therapy or emotional soothing. It is resolved only through re-alignment with truth.
In biblical terms, this structure closely parallels what Jesus describes as the sin against the Holy Spirit — a sin for which there is “no forgiveness” (Mark 3:28–29). This is not because God withholds grace arbitrarily, but because the individual has denied grace at its very root — by calling good evil and evil good. In context, the Pharisees witnessed Jesus heal a demon-possessed man and attributed the work of the Holy Spirit to Beelzebul. In doing so, they denied the truth even as it stood unmistakably before them.
This is the psychological structure of the most severe form of withdrawal. The individual knows — however faintly — what is true. They know what they are meant to do. They know their gifts are being wasted, that their potential lies unfulfilled, that time is slipping by. They know that life is sacred and that meaning is inseparable from sacrifice, responsibility, and generativity. And yet, they refuse to act. They retreat into the digital fog, into the seductive loop of the SAD cycle — not because they are deceived, but because they choose to deny the truth they already know.
This is not mere inertia. It is the behavioral form of attributing the Holy Spirit’s work to Satan — the internalization of a lie so deep it becomes a structure of being. When time is spent in repetitive, emotionally engineered digital engagement — especially by individuals with the withdrawal subtrait of neuroticism — it is not just time wasted. It is life rejected. It is a slow-motion refusal of the sacred obligation to live truthfully and to actualize the gifts one has been given.
And just as the SAD cycle mimics the psychological tactics of dark triad personalities — mixing manipulation, seduction, and deception — so too does it mimic the moral inversion described by Christ. The good is made to seem burdensome; the trivial is made to seem transcendent. Responsibility is exchanged for endless commentary. Joy is outsourced to algorithms. And the soul begins to believe it is too late to return.
But it is not too late. What is required is not another dopamine fix or motivational meme — it is reorientation around an internal moral architecture. And for that, Structured Internal Value Hierarchies (SIVHs) are not a lifestyle option. They are a rescue ladder thrown into the abyss.
The one who must not be named: Withdrawal, existential guilt, and suppressed self-reckoning
As we draw together the psychological, archetypal, and neurobiological elements of the SAD cycle, one final mechanism must be addressed—perhaps the most elusive and psychologically defended: the guilt of having withdrawn from one's existential mission. This dynamic is rarely admitted consciously by individuals with high withdrawal tendencies, especially those high in neuroticism. The existential failure to become what one is capable of becoming — as a parent, partner, leader, or fully developed adult — often remains unnamed, unspoken, and deeply feared.
This internal repression resembles the cultural archetype of the feared truth. A useful metaphor is J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series, where Lord Voldemort is consistently referred to as “He Who Must Not Be Named.” The name itself symbolizes a psychic fragment so deeply feared and suppressed that it cannot be articulated. Similarly, for many individuals trapped in withdrawal, the admission of life-directional failure or abandonment of responsibility is too threatening to confront directly. As such, psychological defense mechanisms — projection, rationalization, minimization, and false self-narratives — arise to preserve a fragile equilibrium.
In these cases, individuals may say, “I just don’t have the motivation,” or “I’m too overwhelmed,” when the unspoken truth is that they are living in full awareness of having turned away from a path they know they were meant to walk. This is not merely depressive resignation; it is what we propose to call ontological guilt — a condition wherein the individual’s a priori moral intuition senses its own betrayal. From a theological standpoint, this dynamic parallels the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Mark 3:28–29): the rejection of a clear inner truth with full awareness of its divine origin.
In psychological terms, this guilt is not merely about unmet expectations. It is existential. It arises not from failing externally, but from the internal dissonance between who one is and who one was meant to become. The mind may refuse to name this failure, but the nervous system, archetypal structure, and symbolic language of the unconscious cannot forget it.
Structured Internal Value Hierarchies (SIVHs) and the induction of positive guilt
The only antidote to this particular form of existential inertia is not shame, punishment, or external motivation — it is positive guilt: a guilt that points not toward self-condemnation, but toward reorientation and transformation.
Our clinical and corporate research within the SelfFusion framework indicates that Structured Internal Value Hierarchies (SIVHs) are one of the few tools capable of inducing such positive guilt in a lasting and ethically productive form. Unlike generic affirmations or vague therapeutic goals, SIVHs are structured around a monotheistic top value — a single, non-negotiable guiding principle (e.g., family, truth, legacy, faith) that reorders all subordinate aims and behaviors. This echoes Viktor Frankl’s logotherapeutic claim that meaning is the fundamental human drive, not pleasure or power (Frankl, 1985).
By aligning with a transcendent top value, individuals are forced — and empowered — to confront their own avoidance. This confrontation is painful, but clarifying. It gives shape to the formless guilt, allowing it to transform into a sense of purposeful responsibility. In many cases, we have witnessed the direct enhancement of the personality trait Orderliness— a subfacet of conscientiousness — once SIVHs are clarified and integrated. This suggests that value-based reorientation can indirectly modify behavioral expression, even within biologically rooted personality structures.
Furthermore, through the lens of the Three-Dimensional Orientation Model (Parvet, 2025), the SIVH operates as the orienting axis that stabilizes perception during existential disarray. It provides not just a compass, but a gravitational pull strong enough to override the artificial seductions of the SAD cycle. Once the individual reorients, the archetypes reverse polarity: the jester is recognized as a fool, the whore as false light, and the divine child as a simulacrum of real generativity. What once enchanted now repels — not through revulsion, but through truth.
This transformation is not theoretical. Our longitudinal observations demonstrate that clarifying and activating SIVHs consistently correlates with decreased SAD consumption, increased behavioral activation, and improved interpersonal alignment, especially in high-neuroticism individuals prone to withdrawal.
Final remark: From avoidance to alignment
The real tragedy of the SAD cycle is not its manipulation, but its resonance. It plays on something real — our archetypes, our longing, our fragility. The only sustainable escape from this neuro-symbolic entrapment is to construct meaning at a deeper level, with internal architecture strong enough to bear the weight of existential responsibility.
By integrating SIVHs, individuals are not simply re-motivated. They are reoriented. The guilt that once paralyzed becomes the fuel for moral action. And the cycle that once promised comfort — madness, sadness, gladness — is revealed for what it is: a beautifully disguised trap. One that can only be escaped by naming the thing that must not be named, and choosing instead to live in truth.
Some of the References Used for the Article
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
Widiger, T. A., & Oltmanns, J. R. (2017). Neuroticism is a fundamental domain of personality with enormous public health implications. World Psychiatry, 16(2), 144–145.
DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880–896.
Barrett, L. F., & Simmons, W. K. (2015). Interoceptive predictions in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16(7), 419–429.
Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D. S., Lin, N., ... & Ybarra, O. (2013). Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults. PLOS ONE, 8(8), e69841.
Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). To see and be seen: Celebrity practice on Twitter. Convergence, 17(2), 139–158.
Turkle, S. (2011). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Basic Books.
Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (1998). What is the role of dopamine in reward: Hedonic impact, reward learning, or incentive salience? Brain Research Reviews, 28(3), 309–369.
Schwartz, B. (2004). The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. Harper Perennial.
Frankl, V. E. (1985). Man’s Search for Meaning. Washington Square Press.
Mark 3:28–29. The Holy Bible, New International Version.
Parvet, W. (2025). The Three-Dimensional Orientation Model as an Antidote to Crisis and the Role of SIVHs. williamparvet.com.
Jung, C. G. (1959). The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious (Collected Works Vol. 9 Part 1). Princeton University Press.
Neumann, E. (1990). The Child: Structure and Dynamics of the Nascent Personality. Princeton University Press.
Rowling, J. K. (1997). Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. Bloomsbury.
Baumeister, R. F., Stillman, T. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2008). Free will in consumer behavior: Self-control, ego depletion, and choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18(1), 4–13.
McAdams, D. P. (2008). Personal narratives and the life story. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of Personality (pp. 242–262). The Guilford Press.
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
Buckels, E. E., Trapnell, P. D., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Trolls just want to have fun. Personality and Individual Differences, 67, 97–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.016
Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2009). The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement. Free Press.
Montag, C., & Elhai, J. D. (2020). Discussing digital technology overuse in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 12, 100313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2020.100313
Meshi, D., Tamir, D. I., & Heekeren, H. R. (2015). The emerging neuroscience of social media. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(12), 771–782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.09.004
Sapolsky, R. M. (2004). Why Zebras Don’t Get Ulcers (3rd ed.). Holt Paperbacks.
McEwen, B. S. (1998). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. New England Journal of Medicine, 338(3), 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199801153380307
van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma. Viking.
Love, T. M. (2014). Oxytocin, motivation and the role of dopamine. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 119, 49–60.
Cardoso, C., Ellenbogen, M. A., Serravalle, L., & Linnen, A. M. (2013). Oxytocin buffers cortisol responses to stress in individuals with high emotional reactivity. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38(11), 2844–2851.
Brown, C. L., et al. (2021). Oxytocin, cortisol, and cognitive control during acute and naturalistic stress. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 129, 105243.
Lasch, C. (1979). The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations. W. W. Norton & Company.
Schore, A. N. (2003). Affect Dysregulation and Disorders of the Self. W. W. Norton & Company.
Lacan, J. (1977). Écrits: A Selection (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Routledge.
Fossati, A., Borroni, S., Eisenberg, N., & Maffei, C. (2010). Relations of proactive and reactive dimensions of aggression to overt and covert narcissism in nonclinical adolescents. Aggressive Behavior, 36(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20330
Huxley, A. (1932). Brave New World. Chatto & Windus.
Campbell, J. (2004). The Hero with a Thousand Faces (Commemorative Edition). Princeton University Press.
Cloninger, C. R. (2004). Feeling Good: The Science of Well-Being. Oxford University Press.
